Online commerce has been recognized as a growing industry in the United States (Kacen
& Lee, 2002). There are significant implications pertaining to online purchasing in the fields of business and psychology. Wang, Minor, and Wei (2010) point out that with the growth of the online retail industry, it has become increasingly important to study how to attract and retain online consumers. It is also essential for business leaders to understand consumer behavior to formulate appropriate marketing strategies (Bayley & Nancarrow, 2010). Concurrently, unregulated forms of consumer behavior, such as impulsive, compulsive, and addictive shopping, can be detrimental to the individual, with outcomes such as bankruptcies or life crises affecting a broad range of social contacts (LaRose & Eastin, 2002).
Impulsive consumer behavior in particular is a phenomenon that is fueled by the growing number of new purchasing arenas, particularly those online (Kacen & Lee, 2002). In fact, impulse purchases were found to constitute 40 percent of all the money spent on commercial websites (User Interface Engineering, 2001). Additionally, Donthu and Garcia (1999) found online shoppers were more impulsive than those who did not shop online. Dennis Rook (1987, p.
191), one of the early researchers of impulse buying, defined the practice as such: “Impulse buying occurs when a consumer experiences a sudden, often powerful and persistent urge to buy something immediately. The impulse to buy is hedonically complex and may stimulate emotional conflict. Also, impulse buying is prone to occur with diminished regard for its consequences.” Different kinds of impulse purchases have been defined, but their shared link is the unplanned nature of the behavior (Parboteeah, Valacich, & Wells, 2009). With contrasting associations, such as spontaneous retail therapy to enhance mood (Atalay & Meloy, 2011), and negative consequences such as poor money management (Lai, 2010), impulsivity makes for an interesting trait to study in conjunction with e-commerce. Impulse buying has been studied with
1

regards to online environment and consumer characteristics, with many factors debated to be relevant. A study by Rook and Fisher (1995) found that different individuals faced with the same situational conditions do not show the same degree of impulsiveness, evidence that impulse purchasing can be explained (at least partially) by psychology. I would predict that website characteristics, particularly those containing cues which emphasize customers’ motivations will be a main predictor of impulse buying online. Similarly, I propose that consumer characteristics, especially those pertaining to mood, self-regulation, and self-image will be important factors related to impulse buying.
Consumer behavior researchers have identified a wide range of elements pertinent to the shopping experience. For instance, Chen, Hsu, and Lin (2008) proposed a web-based model that details the attributes companies should focus on to increase buying: usability, delivery, security, trust, and convenience. However, possessing the “right” functional features (e.g., cheaper merchandise, faster delivery, and shopping assistance tools) to enhance customer experience and therefore purchasing might not be a foolproof model (Wang et al., 2010). Some researchers argue that the atmosphere, here referring to the website interface design and aesthetics, is of utmost importance for increasing revenue (Wang et al., 2010). Research has found that the online trend in consumption style now focuses on entertainment as a means of fulfilling consumers’ hedonic needs versus purely utilitarian functions such as information searching (Childers, Carr,
Peck, & Carson, 2001). The assumption made is that a visually appealing website will provide more satisfaction and thus satisfy this hedonic motive (Wang et al., 2010). This study differentiates between two facets of design. The first is aesthetic formality, defined as the order, legibility, and simplicity of a website, and was found to be more important for customers with utilitarian motives. The second is aesthetic appeal, which refers to the overall impressiveness of a
2

website, and was found to matter more when a shopper did not have a particular goal in mind
(Wang et al., 2010). We could presume elements of aesthetic appeal might include flashy advertisements of special sales, for instance, and this would be more likely to induce unintended buying. This finding demonstrates that when browsing websites online (a potential setting for an impulse purchase) the individual can be swayed by the interface design if it is particularly compelling. Rook’s (1987) definition that describes impulse buying as a hedonically-driven behavior supports aesthetic appeal as being more applicable than aesthetic formality when targeting impulse shoppers. The general conclusion based on this research is that when managing the aesthetics of a website, the varying motivations of the shopper ought to be considered to maximize purchase potential.
This emphasis on the task of the consumer has been drawn out by other researchers.
Parboteeah et al. (2009) manipulated task- and mood-relevant cues in relation to the web environment. Task-relevant cues are those that are necessary for the completion of the shopping goal (such as merchandise description and navigation ads that facilitate the consumer’s task), and they are utilitarian in that they directly support the fulfillment of the customer’s goal (Parboteeah et al., 2009). By contrast, cues that do not directly impact the completion of the shopper’s task and are hedonically related are referred to as mood-relevant cues, because they serve to create a mood on a website. The researchers found that both task- and mood-relevant cues increase the likelihood and magnitude of a consumer’s urges to buy impulsively. Interestingly, when separated, task-relevant and mood-relevant cues each have the effect of increasing customer impulsiveness, but the likelihood and magnitude are strongest when both cues are of high quality
(Parboteaah et al., 2009). This research also supports the findings from Wang et al. (2010) in that the consumer goal in addition to the type of online environment yield different combinations of
3

task- and mood-relevant cues. For instance, hedonistic websites that users come to for the purpose of enjoyment would do better to emphasize mood-relevant cues as these are more prevalent in this setting. Given Rook’s (1987) findings that roughly half of consumers referenced hedonic components when describing the experience of impulse buying, web designers might do best to focus attention on the mood their site produces in consumers. Examples of this have been found: The perception of a website as more sincere and trustworthy creates a more positive attitude in the customer, and one can assume this would improve mood (Poddar, Naveen, & Wei,
2009).
The research presented thus far regarding website characteristics converges with psychological explanations for impulse shopping. Rook and Fisher (1995, p. 306) proposed that a transient moderator in the act of impulse buying is the shopper’s normative evaluations, which are defined as a “consumer’s judgment about the appropriateness of making an impulse purchase in a particular buying situation.” They also asserted that different impulse buying situations can elicit varying normative evaluations. Important to this model is the temporal delay that occurs between the buying impulse and the actual purchase; it is argued that even in a short span of time the consumer is able to think and evaluate (in short, consider the normative response). The normative response could be positive or negative. For example, spending lottery winnings versus rent money on an impulse purchase will be viewed very differently. The findings from this study were somewhat complex in nature; for instance, consumers rated as higher in the impulsiveness trait who viewed a purchase negatively seem to experience differing degrees of ambivalence.
This can result in resisting the urge to buy or rationalizing/providing exceptions to the negative normative conditions (Rook & Fisher, 1995).
4

One researcher believes that the moderating effects of normative evaluations can’t possibly account for the high incidence of impulse buying found in recent studies (Hausman,
2000). Hausman suggested alternate explanations, such as the moderating effects of accuracy, which “influence the perceived trade-off between cognitive effort and decision-making accuracy” (p.414). She asserted that retailers can make the setting conducive to spending by relieving customers of negative perceptions about impulse buying. Relating to this accuracy component, she stated retailers can create complex environments—by stocking excess merchandise and creating a stimulating atmosphere—that make it difficult for consumers to process information (Hausman, 2000). This is applicable to the online world in terms of website dynamics and creating a visually interesting site as a means of increasing purchasing.
Despite Hausman’s belief that normative evaluations are not a suitable explanation for the phenomenon, other research has provided contrasting evidence. Miao (2010) echoes Rook’s
(1987) claim that impulse buying is a hedonically-driven trait. Her research found that higher levels of impulsive buying are linked to feelings of pleasure experienced from making a purchase. Miao describes impulse buying as first being experienced as a lower-order feeling of pleasure because of its uncertain and exciting nature, which then evokes higher-order cognitive processes concerning normative evaluations. Despite the spontaneous nature of impulse buying, this research emphasizes that shoppers do in fact go through a cognitive evaluation process, at least subconsciously, which involves normative judgments about their impulsive behavior. This process largely shapes the prevailing reaction to the impulse purchase. The marketing implications suggested by Miao include focusing on positive outcomes of self-indulgence to mask the loss of self-control experienced by consumers, and to channel their ambivalence in a
5

positive direction (2002). Online retailers could use this tactic by employing advertising content on their sites encouraging the customer to “treat yourself!”
Miao’s research makes reference to the affective responses of consumers, an area which has been studied in relation to impulse shopping. Mood has been cited as one of the most important factors contributing to impulse buying (e.g., Atalay & Meloy, 2011; Dittmar, Beattie,
& Friese, 1996). Dittmar et al. (1996) found that mood was the most significant of psychological factors for both men and women. They specifically looked at different conditions and characteristics across gender, and found that both men and women high in materialism and idealactual self-discrepancies were most focused on improving their mood when shopping impulsively. Dittmar et al. (1996) predicted that mood could be a driving force that increases attention to self-discrepancies, and thus initiates such activities to self-repair as impulse buying.
This research is based on the theoretical framework that views impulse purchasing as a projection of an individual’s self-image. The model proposes that to counteract negative feelings regarding self-discrepancies, individuals will turn to shopping to provide an “emotional lift and momentary euphoria” (Dittmar et al., 1996, p. 204). This research also presents other notable findings, such as a significant difference between types of goods purchased on impulse. In accordance with the proposed model, items that were bought more impulsively, such as jewelry and sports equipment, seem to be symbolic of self-image and gender considerations, compared with items more likely to be bought in a planned purchase, such as body care items and footwear
(Dittmar et al., 1996). Later qualitative research from Dittmar and Drury (2000), in which consumers were interviewed, provides further support for the importance of mood. One interviewee said, “Oh when I’m, you know, when I’m depressed I’ll go out shopping to cheer myself up. And when I feel happy I’ll go out shopping for fun. It’s like some people might eat
6

when they feel miserable. You know, its comfort” (Dittmar & Drury, 2000, p.129). Dittmar and
Drury further describe a gendered relationship between self-image and impulse buying, as women were more likely to describe self-image apprehensions in relation to using shopping as an outlet.
Other researchers have also referenced mood as a primary force behind impulse shopping. Atalay and Meloy (2011) not only conjecture that impulsive shopping is an effort to manage mood, but assert this is a strategic decision. Their study found that self-treats are often purchased without prior planning. Additionally, impulse shopping appeared to be a direct solution to repairing mood, but Atalay and Meloy (2011) noted this was not the case if a goal of being restrained was present. This means that there is a potential degree of self-control individuals can exercise if their attention is called to it. Also notable is the finding that impulse buying results from temporary, mildly negative affective states, but is not associated with more pervasive conditions such as loneliness (Atalay & Meloy, 2011). Additionally, in this research no distinctions were made between the specific negative emotions (fear, sadness, anger, etc.).
Further research is needed to determine if differences exist between these mood states.
A final perspective relevant to impulsive shopping focuses on self-regulation. Baumeister
(2002) describes self-regulation as a term interchangeable with self-control, meaning the self’s ability to change and modify its own states and responses. Self-control responses can consist of varying thoughts, changing emotions, regulating impulses, or altering performances (Baumeister,
2002). He argues that the ability to resist an impulse, such as making a purchase, rests largely on the individual’s penchant to self-regulate. Three factors are cited as contributing to a failure in self-control: standards (goals, morals, norms, and other guidelines that signify the desired response), a monitoring process (keeping track of relevant behavior), and the capacity to alter
7

one’s behavior (Baumeister, 2002). Significant to the current analysis of impulsive buying, selfcontrol was linked to money management and thus has consumer behavior implications
(Baumeister, 2002). Additional research has found deficient self-regulation to be a significant predictor of online buying (LaRose & Eastin, 2002). Interestingly, offline shopping was not significantly related, but further research is needed to confirm why this might be. The researchers hypothesize that this finding lines up with the socio-cognitive view, which emphasizes that behavior is influenced by situational factors. If this is the case, online shopping environments present challenges to self-regulation not posed in the offline world (LaRose & Eastin, 2002). The results of this study also showed that rational consumer decision making (e.g., comparing prices) was a much weaker predictor of online shopping compared with inadequate self-regulation.
Thus, the inability to control the self appears to be a significant predictor of why an impulse purchase might occur.
The reasons for impulsive buying presented here are far from the only explanations researchers have tested, but this analysis serves to highlight some of the prevailing psychological perspectives. Additionally, aside from some preliminary findings, there is not much research comparing online and offline impulsive buying. It is important to not discount the potential differences in commerce that exist in the online and offline worlds. The research discussed has shown that situation is indeed a factor that can influence impulse buying, giving weight to the argument that generalizing from the offline world to the online world might not be simple, as two varying environments are at work. This presents an avenue for further research, particularly in the online realm as it continues to grow into a highly popular method of shopping.
8

References
Atalay, A.S. & Meloy, M.G. (2011). Retail therapy: A strategic effort to improve mood.
Psychology & Marketing, 28(6) , 638-660.
Baumeister, R.F. (2002). Yielding to temptation: self-control failure, impulsive purchasing, and consumer behavior. Journal of Consumer Research, 28 , 670-676.
Bayley, G. & Nancarrow, C. (1998). Impulse purchasing: A qualitative exploration of the phenomenon. Qualitative Market Research: An International Journal, 1(2) , 99-114.
Chen, Y., Hsu, I., & Lin, C. (2008). Website attributes that increase consumer purchase intention: A conjoint analysis. Journal of Business Research, 63(9-10) , 1007-1014.
Childers, T.L., Carr, C.L., Peck, J., & Carson, S. (2001). Hedonic and utilitarian motivations for online retail shopping behavior. Journal of Retailing, 77(4) , 511-35.
Donthu, N. & Garcia, A. (1999). The internet shopper. Journal of Advertising Research, 39(3) ,
52-58.
Dittmar, H., Beattie, J., & Friese, S.(1996). Objects, decision considerations and self-image in men’s and women’s impulse purchases.
Acta Psychologica, 93 , 187-206.
Dittmar, H. & Drury, J. (2000). Self image – is it in the bag? A qualitative comparison between “ordinary” and “excessive” consumers.
Journal of Economic Psychology, 21 ,
109-142.
Hausman, A. (2000). A multi-method investigation of consumer motivations in impulse buying behavior. Journal of Consumer Marketing, 17(5), 403-419.
Kacen, J.J. & Lee, J. (2002). The influence of culture on consumer impulsive buying behavior.
Journal of Consumer Psychology, 12(2) , 163-176.
Lai, C. (2010). How financial attitudes and practices influence the impulsive buying behavior of college and university students. Social Behavior and Personality, 38(3) ,
373-380.
LaRose, R. & Eastin, M.S. (2002). Is online buying out of control? Electronic commerce and consumer self-regulation. Journal of Broadcasting & Electronic Media, 46(4) , 594-564.
Miao, L. (2010). Guilty pleasure or pleasurable guilt? Affective experience of impulse buying in hedonic-driven consumption.
101.
Journal of Hospitality & Tourism Research, 35(1), 79-
Parboteeah, D.V., Valacich, J.S., & Wells, J.D. (2009). The influence of website characteristics on a consumer’s urge to buy impulsively.
Information Systems Research, 20(1) , 60-79.
9

Poddar, A., Donthu, N., & Wei, Y. (2009). Web site customer orientations, web site quality, and purchase intentions: The role of web site personality. Journal of Business
Research, 62(4) , 441-450.
Rook, D.W. (1987). The buying impulse. Journal of Consumer Research, 14 , 189-199.
Rook, D.W. & Fisher, R.J. (1995). Normative influences on impulsive buying behavior.
Journal of Consumer Research, 22 , 305-313.
User Interface Engineering (2001). What causes customers to buy on impulse? [Electronic
Version]. Retrieved March 17, 2012, http://www.uie.com/publications/whitepapers/ImpulseBuying.pdf
Wang, Y., Minor, M.S., & Wei, J. (2010). Aesthetics and the online shopping environment:
Understanding consumer responses. Journal of Retailing, 7(1) , 46-58.
10